Sure. But there's no reason to assume the Tampa Bay times and every other media outlet is reporting this in a biased fashion. I've also watched the video, this guy may technically have a handicap but he sure isn't walking with a walker or cane or even so much as a limp. So let's not act like this was some poor crippled old man. He's 47 y/o and was able to walk all around the car with no issues and then stand and yell at the woman.
Stand your ground?
- Thread starter QuaZ2002
- Start date
- Status
You can carry in a place that serves alcohol. The issue is actually imbibing while carrying. Don’t drink and carry your firearm, it can and does alter the decision making process.
You need to separate the two. Alcohol violates the CCW.
Your friends have issues with alcohol and mixed in a gun
There are plenty of CCW instructors that would not teach this is the proper response. This take on this specific scenario is doing more harm than good for people that think stand your ground is a fine law. And honestly I am one that thinks stand your ground is fine. The application of it is a failure as it would be in this specific case just based on the video. If there is additional info related to verbal threats then I may perhaps change my mind on it being a good application. But just the video, nothing do I see constitutes reason to shoot the guy. Why would the DA at minimum not take it to a grand jury to see if charges should be brought?
It is a little more complex than that. An establishment that serves alcoholic beverages as its main business purpose, such as a bar, tavern, or pub. These establishments make a profit by selling alcoholic beverages you cannot carry your firearm into these places.
However, it gets trickier when you are talking about a restaurant that has a bar in it. The prohibition also extends to the "portion" of a business whose sole purpose is to serve alcoholic beverages. The safest thing to do is stay in the restaurant portion of the establishment and do not sit at or in the bar area.
I would assert it is naive to not understand every media outlet has their own biases.
If I look up this incident in The Root the headline is “The Stand Your Ground Law Protects Shooter Who Killed Black Man Over Parking Space”
What the writer chooses to include and not include will always work to shape your view. Best defense against it is to find as many sources as possible to see what each of them include and leave out.
Sure. That’s a headline on a liberal website. Are you suggesting that every media outlet is deciding to not report this guy is actually handicapped? The TBT article is purely facts.
Yes, they do.
I brought that up to them when I took my CCW training and filled out the application. Bottom line, they are willfully breaking the law, yes. They are the kind that don't believe you even need a permit to carry, although they do have their permits.
Last edited:
That is exactly the rhetoric that was used in pushing for the law, over the top verbiage about turning your back & implying that our prisons were full of people convicted of murder while simply defending themselves.
'Pure facts' like this? Jacobs parked in the handicap spot, she said, because the parking lot was busy and they were just stopping for a minute.
...she said. "I minded my own business … I didn’t do anything wrong."
TBT didn't include facts like the race of the shooter and the deceased, but other outlets consider those 'pure facts' worth reporting. It's hard to know what other facts TBT didn't relay, or bother to investigate.
Wow, 6 pages. I'm sad I was working today and missed this one brewing.
Here's my take.
Handicap sheriff will probably not escape a trial.
At the same time, blame does go on fake handicap parker, and dead guy. You should never physically attack anyone unless you are A. Under attack B. Imminently in danger of being attacked. Should the dead guy have gotten a death sentence for pushing a guy down? No, but he did throw the guy to the ground. And now he is a dead guy. It doesn't matter to dead guy one bit if the sheriff of handicapham sees a day behind bars. He chose violence, and he got violence.
Here's my take.
Handicap sheriff will probably not escape a trial.
At the same time, blame does go on fake handicap parker, and dead guy. You should never physically attack anyone unless you are A. Under attack B. Imminently in danger of being attacked. Should the dead guy have gotten a death sentence for pushing a guy down? No, but he did throw the guy to the ground. And now he is a dead guy. It doesn't matter to dead guy one bit if the sheriff of handicapham sees a day behind bars. He chose violence, and he got violence.
Not so sure about that - who would be the target of the suit? The handicop probably doesn't have much, so no big profit in using him. From the video, it doesn't appear to be a location of a large corporate chain .- it looks like a locally owned store in a not so great neighborhood. Doubt the owner has deep pockets or a high dollar liability policy. If you win a judgement, what are you gonna collect? A bunch of stale candy and chips, a bunch of incense, and some bottles of bum wine?
Last edited:
“An armed society is a polite society” lol what? We are literally discussing a case where there was anything but politeness involved from either party.
But let’s just say to lady in the car had a permit and a concealed weapon. What happens after the man shoots and kills her husband. would she be in her right (considering the stand ur ground law) to then shoot the man who shot her husband? I believe in that moment she would be in fear of her and her child’s safety. After all, he has a gun and used it, not unreasonable to feel she would be threatened.
It was a quote. I’m not sure what you’re implying, they directly quoted a person who said something incorrect. You know what else is incorrect? The sheriff saying the victim slammed the guy to the ground. I’ve never heard a shove referred to as a slam.
So they included more than 'pure facts'? Glad that point is sinking in.
Your ignorance is only evidence of your ignorance:
slam
verb: slam; 3rd person present: slams; past tense: slammed; past participle: slammed; gerund or present participle: slamming
- 1.
shut (a door, window, or lid) forcefully and loudly.
"he slams the door behind him as he leaves"
synonyms: bang, shut/close with a bang, shut/close noisily, shut/close with force
"he slammed the door behind him"- be closed forcefully and loudly.
"she heard a car door slam" - push or put somewhere with great force.
"Charlie slammed down the phone" - crash into; collide heavily with.
"the car mounted the sidewalk, slamming into a lamppost"
synonyms: crash into, smash into, collide with, hit, strike, ram, plow into, run into, bump into, impact
"the car slammed into a post" - informal
hit (something) with great force in a particular direction.
"he slammed a shot into the net"
- be closed forcefully and loudly.
Haha sinking in? You’re incorrect in assuming that the article written by the TBT is biased in any direction. The article is stating the facts. Including quotes is not a bias. They reached out to the murderer and he obviously chose not to share his side which I have 0 doubt they would have included. They reported the news it wasn’t an editorial or opinion piece whatsoever. I’m still waiting for someone to confirm this guy who had no issue walking whatsoever was actually handicapped. But lemme guess, you own more than a couple guns, don’t you?
As is dishonesty. And as is propaganda - the best of which takes some truth and presents it in a dishonest fashion.
This was brought up in the other thread by DFS, and while he was being funny, it actually is a really good point.
Would this guy had been justified to shoot the girl?
Would this guy had been justified to shoot the girl?
What the hay is polite about the situation we have been discussing? What was he defending himself from when the shover was backing up? You really want that cat who fired the weapon to carry? Maybe in your neighborhood?
You have revealed over the years a vested interest in firearm proliferation and “justification” for using said firearms in situations that once were deemed petty. You promote shooting of citizens under some veil of legality.
You sir, take advantage of fear tactics in order to make money and promote the degradation of civil order.
You pour fuel on the fire, telling people to fear one another.
Who needs enemies, with friends like you have. Your tactics promote civil disorder.
No, but only because the girl is not wearing baggy clothing that she could use to hide a gun. She is dressed appropriately for not getting shot.
I am not some rabid CCW instructor. I am one of the best professional firearms and tactics instructors on this planet, and we teach how to AVOID situations like the one we are speaking about now. However, we also teach our students, that should the need arise, how to respond to those situations properly. We train the highest level of military divisions from all over the world, SWAT teams, local police, private citizens & movie stars to skill levels beyond anything government can accomplish. We hear things that happen every day under your noses that would make your knees shake in your Dockers. Real things, like child sex trafficking, kidnapping, assault, rape, home invasions, armed robberies, and far worse, happening in places you don’t hear about.
We teach an everyday color code of mental awareness that teaches our students to be aware of their surrounding at all times, and it has saved lives.
I wish we didn’t have to have these discussions, but there are many on these boards that have the luxury of not knowing what I know about the true state of affairs in this country today. Not training to defend yourself and your family is just insane to me.
Think what you want, but the world is not a safe space, and we train our students accordingly.
We may respectfully disagree, but I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to have these discussions.
You seem like a pretty good guy, and this platitude may be true, I don’t know, but I do know that it sounds incredibly dooshy when anyone says stuff like this about themselves.
The shooting we have witnessed is awful and promotes vigilante actions if backed up by a law that suggests that the shooting is legal and OK.
You can read and watch the reports. That cat should not legally own a firearm. At what point would you suggest he should be disarmed in the fashion that Germany or Switzerland would do so?
You say that your teachings have saved lives, and that is likely so.
However, if you argue that this shooting was justified, I suggest that you promote civil disorder and vigilante justice. There is no place on earth for shooting a man based on a trivial argument.
Could you sleep after committing such an act?
I get that. The reason I said it though, is because there are a number of responses leading with “such and such CCW instructor said”. We are WAY beyond some gun show or gun shop CCW instructor. Read up on Front Sight.
Like I have said throughout these discussions, I don’t agree with what the shooter did. I believe strongly that the victim in this case exacerbated the situation by not talking first, but assaulting the shooter. When we analyze videos, we try to put ourselves in the position of every party involved and attempt to understand the actions taken by each party. In this case, it is very hard to say what we would do definitively, because we are missing key data. I believe there were other options, but when you are assaulted, things get heavy quick.
In this case, the key missing data is: How disabled is the shooter really? How hard was that shove? Was the shooter hurt and scared? Was there verbal communications by the victim indicating the assault was going to continue? Was the victim armed? We see the victim go to his waistband area as he took a step back. What was being said by the shooter to the girlfriend in the car? Did she threaten the shooter that the victim would hurt the shooter?
No one was there that doesn’t have a dog in the fight at this point. And as I write this post, the race baiters have begun their act, and the press outcry for “justice” has started.
I don’t envy this DA, and I envision politics getting involved.
I posted my opinion, and that’s what it is, is my professional opinion.
I am really interested to hear your take on the question I asked. In your opinion would u feel the women in the car (if she had a permit and weapon) would have been justified in shooting the man after he shot her husband. I think most people can agree that she had reason to be in fear of her and her children’s lives
Well ok, but I was not asking if it has happened before. I was asking your opinion on if she would have been justified In the shooting, given the stand your ground law?
I think she was out of the car - liked like she got out right as dead guy was walking out of the store, and was almost right by him when he got shot.
Concealed Handgun Permit holder here in Virginia. Only reason I got it was for hunting purposes, for protection in the woods. To carry an handgun during Archery and Muzzleloader season you have to have a permit to carry the handgun with you in the woods. Where we hunt we have a good bear population along with a thriving coyote population. I want an out in case I get cornered by either. I actually got corner by two pit bulls while archery hunting last year as I was walking on our property, dogs where on a neighbors property and where out of their pens. One barked and growled in front of me as the other walked behind me to what I assume would be an attacked from the rear. My gun was in my hand, ready to shoot, but I stood my ground, kept calm, and they went away. Then I called animal control.
Qualifications to get a permit in VA are a number of different things to include a hunters safety course certificate, which I have and used to qualify for the permit. Am I qualified in a situation like this discussion, hell no, no way. That's why I don't carry in everyday situations. I have never, in my life, been in a situation that warranted using a handgun. Will I be in a situation in the future, who knows, but until I feel qualified to carry like this, then I won't.
I will say this though, with the ease of getting a permit, you certainly do not know who is carrying and who is not, so the best thing to do is be courteous, don't escalate a situation and walk away. Avoid road rage idiots and let them crash and burn, they will eventually. I typically don't put myself in places or situations that I may have an issue where I would need a gun.
Having said, you break into my house, threaten my family, for whatever reason, your dead, period...I will let the justice system work itself out after that.
In this situation, regardless of the law, this shooter was in the wrong. I get what Bud is saying and I agree with him to a point, but the victim was walking away, and It looked to me like he hesitated after he pulled his weapon, then shot as he was retreating.
If the rumors are true and he had other instances where he brandished his gun, he must have thought he was a bad ass and was waiting on a situation to use it. Well he got his wish, now he gets to work through the consequences. My bet is he wont survive it. What was the quote Jeff Bridges said to Chris Pike in Hell or High Water? "It will never be over. It will haunt you for the rest of your days".
The DA probably wont prosecute based on the unwillingness of the Sherriff to press charges, but I bet they form a grand jury and get an indictment. Then a jury can decide what to do, as it should be in this case.
Qualifications to get a permit in VA are a number of different things to include a hunters safety course certificate, which I have and used to qualify for the permit. Am I qualified in a situation like this discussion, hell no, no way. That's why I don't carry in everyday situations. I have never, in my life, been in a situation that warranted using a handgun. Will I be in a situation in the future, who knows, but until I feel qualified to carry like this, then I won't.
I will say this though, with the ease of getting a permit, you certainly do not know who is carrying and who is not, so the best thing to do is be courteous, don't escalate a situation and walk away. Avoid road rage idiots and let them crash and burn, they will eventually. I typically don't put myself in places or situations that I may have an issue where I would need a gun.
Having said, you break into my house, threaten my family, for whatever reason, your dead, period...I will let the justice system work itself out after that.
In this situation, regardless of the law, this shooter was in the wrong. I get what Bud is saying and I agree with him to a point, but the victim was walking away, and It looked to me like he hesitated after he pulled his weapon, then shot as he was retreating.
If the rumors are true and he had other instances where he brandished his gun, he must have thought he was a bad ass and was waiting on a situation to use it. Well he got his wish, now he gets to work through the consequences. My bet is he wont survive it. What was the quote Jeff Bridges said to Chris Pike in Hell or High Water? "It will never be over. It will haunt you for the rest of your days".
The DA probably wont prosecute based on the unwillingness of the Sherriff to press charges, but I bet they form a grand jury and get an indictment. Then a jury can decide what to do, as it should be in this case.
I agree. We are moving closer and closer to the wild west days. As usual, instead of learning from our history, we repeat the mistakes.
The Wild West wasn't nearly as wild as peole claim. There actually wasn't much shooting and many towns didn't allow people to carry guns.
- Status
